|
On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them.
Try to avoid the regions with the landmines.
|
On December 22 2016 02:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them. Try to avoid the regions with the landmines.
Did you know that Western Sahara possesses world's longest continuous minefield? What a sight that must be!
|
On December 22 2016 02:31 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2016 02:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them. Try to avoid the regions with the landmines. Did you know that Western Sahara possesses world's longest continuous minefield? What a sight that must be!
Yeah, I heard it's mind-blowing !
|
On December 22 2016 02:53 oGoZenob wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2016 02:31 opisska wrote:On December 22 2016 02:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them. Try to avoid the regions with the landmines. Did you know that Western Sahara possesses world's longest continuous minefield? What a sight that must be! Yeah, I heard it's mind-blowing !
Definitely swept me off my feet 
After that I just roll through life.
|
On December 22 2016 04:01 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2016 02:53 oGoZenob wrote:On December 22 2016 02:31 opisska wrote:On December 22 2016 02:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them. Try to avoid the regions with the landmines. Did you know that Western Sahara possesses world's longest continuous minefield? What a sight that must be! Yeah, I heard it's mind-blowing ! Definitely swept me off my feet After that I just roll through life.
Trying to think on my feet, but can't come up with any dry jokes.
|
On December 22 2016 08:31 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2016 04:01 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 22 2016 02:53 oGoZenob wrote:On December 22 2016 02:31 opisska wrote:On December 22 2016 02:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2016 02:11 opisska wrote:
Is Western Sahara a dangerous destination for travel, in particular if you plan to visit remote areas, spend nights there and wander around with a telescope and a long lens on a camera?
Is it a good idea to travel into such destination when you are getting weird seemingly neurological symptoms in the last few days, but have no idea if there is something really wrong with you or it is all just psychological?
I know, hard questions, that's why I have set on a mission to answer them. Try to avoid the regions with the landmines. Did you know that Western Sahara possesses world's longest continuous minefield? What a sight that must be! Yeah, I heard it's mind-blowing ! Definitely swept me off my feet After that I just roll through life. Trying to think on my feet, but can't come up with any dry jokes.
Mining for jokes is dangerous, get it wrong and it'll blow up in your face.
|
I like how hilarious the prospect of me blowing up is to my internet friends
|
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened?
|
On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened?
I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it.
|
On December 23 2016 04:18 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened? I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it.
I have some family that everyone is fairly certain has diabetes, but he won't get checked because (as he says) he'd rather not know. And it made me curious about the question in the more abstract sense. If I were in his position, would I want to know?
|
On December 23 2016 04:21 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 04:18 ThomasjServo wrote:On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened? I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it. I have some family that everyone is fairly certain has diabetes, but he won't get checked because (as he says) he'd rather not know. And it made me curious about the question in the more abstract sense. If I were in his position, would I want to know?
I'd definitely want to know, and it isn't close. Untreated diabetes is significantly worse than treated diabetes. The question becomes more interesting if it was some disease or condition where treatment only leads to marginal improvements.
|
On December 23 2016 04:21 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 04:18 ThomasjServo wrote:On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened? I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it. I have some family that everyone is fairly certain has diabetes, but he won't get checked because (as he says) he'd rather not know. And it made me curious about the question in the more abstract sense. If I were in his position, would I want to know?
Diabetes you should definitely get checked. its treatable and you probably won't have serious health problems until your really old as long as you deal with it.
|
On December 23 2016 04:37 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 04:21 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 23 2016 04:18 ThomasjServo wrote:On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened? I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it. I have some family that everyone is fairly certain has diabetes, but he won't get checked because (as he says) he'd rather not know. And it made me curious about the question in the more abstract sense. If I were in his position, would I want to know? I'd definitely want to know, and it isn't close. Untreated diabetes is significantly worse than treated diabetes. The question becomes more interesting if it was some disease or condition where treatment only leads to marginal improvements.
I didn't even think of that--I really should talk to him about it in that context.
|
Yeah, diabetes is definitely life threatening if unattended. He'll get hyperglycemic whoch can put him in a coma or worse (this is worst case scenario though).
It's a progressive disease nonetheless, but if he does get hyperglycemic, chances are he'll get into the hospital and be auto-diagnosed anyway.. Don't think it's smart to get diagnosed like this. It's always better to prevent getting a bad (or worse case) scenario than to find out the hard way.
|
On December 23 2016 04:52 Uldridge wrote:
Yeah, diabetes is definitely life threatening if unattended. He'll get hyperglycemic whoch can put him in a coma or worse (this is worst case scenario though).
It's a progressive disease nonetheless, but if he does get hyperglycemic, chances are he'll get into the hospital and be auto-diagnosed anyway.. Don't think it's smart to get diagnosed like this. It's always better to prevent getting a bad (or worse case) scenario than to find out the hard way.
Lest you skip straight to the fun, insulin dependent bit of type two. It's like hitting a shitty ladder in chutes and ladders.
|
Diabetes type II is still no fun story though.. But it's more manageable, like coeliac disease. Diet is very important.
I guess I've forgot what the nuanced differences were between the types, but type 1 is the bad one. Wouldn't it be exrtemely important to know which one of the 2 it was, though?
Either you choose: healthier lifestyle on one hand versus potential coma/death on the other if untreated. Is the 50/50 worth it?
|
|
|
Type one is born with it, Type 2 you ate and or drank yourself diabetic through lifestyle factors/genetic disposition.
|
Not necessarily, I think auto-immunity for example can arise at any age. Also, there are many factors that can make type 1 occurr. Type 1 is just saying that your body doesn't produce enough insulin. This can happen through many different ways.
|
On December 23 2016 04:37 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 04:21 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 23 2016 04:18 ThomasjServo wrote:On December 23 2016 04:14 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Is it better to die ignorant or to die burdened? I like to think I exist in the middleground where I'm sufficiently burdened to know the weight of the world, but apathetic enough to not act on that knowledge, or not be too terribly concerned with it. I have some family that everyone is fairly certain has diabetes, but he won't get checked because (as he says) he'd rather not know. And it made me curious about the question in the more abstract sense. If I were in his position, would I want to know? I'd definitely want to know, and it isn't close. Untreated diabetes is significantly worse than treated diabetes. The question becomes more interesting if it was some disease or condition where treatment only leads to marginal improvements.
It's similar in cancer research as well. When we analyse samples from patients, for research purposes, we usually only report back to the clinician of we find something actionable. That is, something that will change the way the patient is treated. To the extent that more clinical inclined analysis only bothers to analyse genes that are actionable. Why look at the others if you won't report back anyway?
Predisposing germline variants are a bit of a middle ground. It is actionable in the sense that you can monitor the patient closer if you think there is a higher risk cancer, to stay treating earlier. But it's a balance between the mental stress that creates, and how elevated the risk is and how much difference earlier diagnosis actually makes. So sometimes we get samples where we don't have ethical permission to look for predisposing germline variants.
In light of that, the question is how much difference does it make to know that you have diabetes? Judging from others it seems pretty actionable. In the sense that medical treatment can help him live a better life. Also, it seems like he is already pretty suspicious, so it's not like it's a lot of extra emotional stress to find out? It's not a big difference between everyone telling him that he probably has diabetes and a doctor actually diagnosing him? And imagine the relief of it turns out that he doesn't have it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
